|| Satyameva Jayate ||

Dedicated to “Bharat” and “Dharma”

Secularism has its own agenda

Extracts from a BBC news story:

“…Dr Nazir Ali, the bishop of Rochester…in a separate interview with the BBC…said

“Britishness” had to be recovered if it was to “have the identity to face another highly organised ideology, perhaps for the first time since the disappearance of Marxism”.

He said the government’s approach to multiculturalism was wrong, adding: ” I think an affirmation of the Christian roots of British society would actually provide a better way of affirming other people than the sort of secular all-faiths-are-the-same kind of route.

“Because the secular approach will in the end marginalise everybody.”

Try substituting “Hindu” for “Christian” and “Indian” for “British” in the extract above. Could he be talking about India, I wonder?


Here are some more extracts from the Bishop’s comments as they appeared in The Telegraph:

“…Alongside these developments, there has been a worldwide resurgence of the ideology of Islamic extremism.

…Attempts have been made to impose an “Islamic” character on certain areas, for example, by insisting on artificial amplification for the Adhan, the call to prayer. Such amplification was, of course, unknown throughout most of history and its use raises all sorts of questions about noise levels and whether non-Muslims wish to be told the creed of a particular faith five times a day on the loudspeaker.

This is happening here even though some Muslim-majority communities are trying to reduce noise levels from multiple mosques announcing this call, one after the other, over quite a small geographical area.

There is pressure already to relate aspects of the sharia to civil law in Britain. To some extent this is already true of arrangements for sharia-compliant banking but have the far-reaching implications of this been fully considered?

Much of this has come about because of a “neutral” secularist approach which refuses to privilege any faith. In fact, secularism has its own agenda and it is certainly not neutral…”

Well said.

Related Posts:

“Secular Fundamentalism”…alive & kicking in India 

Secularism or Politics of Appeasement? 

Perverse secularism and India’s future 

“Pseudo-secularism” at its best? 

Another fine example of pseudo-secularism 

January 8th, 2008 Posted by | A Hindu Identity, An Indian Identity, Current Affairs, Impact of Islam on India, Islam & Terrorism, Politics and Governance in India | 8 comments


  1. Dear Sir,
    Very aptly said. The humbug of the truth of Xtians is exposed and the worms are climbing out of the wall. This should be an eyeopener for all our “Secularists”.
    This goes to show being rulers they were able to impose their thought in every way and schemed it so well that generations of Indians have been brainwashed to thinking that their religion is a wash out.
    It highlights the fact that basically these Xtians were not interested in eliminating the supposed “CASTE” differenciation here but only out and out to destroy the social fabric of the country.
    I am so happy to note that thery are feeling the heat and now turning out to be out and out “Pseudos” when it comes to Xtianity.
    This must have been a body blow to our frothing “Pseudo”s” and I am sure no proud “Pseudo” will have the temerity to make this public. I am sure there will not be any Face the nations, Witness, Big Fights, or Devil Advocates on this topic as it will go against the grain of the thinking of these major “ANCHOR’s” of these shows.
    What a downfall my men!
    Et tu Brute!!! (A Pseudo’s lament).

    Comment by v.c.krishnan | January 10, 2008

  2. FYI.

    ….the new poster boys of the secular camp: Sanjay Dutt, Afzal Guru and Sohrabuddin.

    Who is a secularist?
    10 Jan 2008, 0014 hrs IST,Mahesh Jethmalani
    The writer is a senior advocate.

    Comment by Bharat | January 11, 2008

  3. @ vck: Thanks for your comment.

    @ Bharat: Thanks for alerting me to the article… I picked up these excerpts:

    It is evident from the Gujarat election that it is the secularists who tend to communally polarise the polity

    It is their stand on terrorism that destroys utterly the credibility of so-called secular parties. Consider for example the new poster boys of the secular camp: Sanjay Dutt, Afzal Guru and Sohrabuddin.

    …In the case of Afzal Guru the rationale for seeking the commutation of his death sentence is singularly misconceived given the gravity of the crime in which he was involved.

    …was Sohrabuddin’s case singled out and highlighted by the media merely because he was a Muslim killed in Modi-ruled Gujarat?

    Gujarat 2007 has exposed the secular establishment. Secularism in India no longer means justice for the poor and oppressed minority. On recent evidence it has become a convenient shibboleth to promote the interests of a sinister mafia.

    It is time for secularists to reflect and take stock.

    The alternative is to increasingly sound like apologists for foreign-inspired terrorists and subversives of every hue.

    Comment by B Shantanu | January 11, 2008

  4. Dear Sir,
    Very rightly said. It is to promote the interests of a sinsiter mafia that “Secularism” still exists in the worl of dictionaries.
    As long as the agenda of untruth and destruction of history and culture could be continued the word “Secular” had no meaning in a ruling society.
    As soon as the power of a way of life which justified destruction of another way of life was found waning, disintegrating, or the posionous agenda being questioned we find the “Secularists” shouting and screaming at their top of their voice that “Secularism” was being destroyed.
    Unless the meaningless continous jabber and chatter of the foreign inspired untrue news rooms are disccussed threadbare and exposed the word “Secularism and Secualrists” will always find supporters.

    Comment by v.c.krishnan | January 14, 2008

  5. A must read article.

    The Secular Road to Hell
    by Ramananda Sengupta

    … (the word secular) was added by the Indira Gandhi government during the Emergency, through the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, along with 58 other changes. The word ‘Socialist’ too was added, while ‘Unity of the nation’ was changed to ‘unity and integrity of the nation.’

    “My Maulana has told us that being a democracy, we can turn India into a Muslim country purely on the basis of votes. And we will. Perhaps not today. But someday, our children will rule, for sure. Nothing can stop us,” …

    Comment by Bharat | January 18, 2008

  6. From a recent article in The Hindu:
    ..To put it in perspective, while Britain is a secular society in practice the British state is Christian with an established church headed by the Queen. The only religious figures with the right to sit in Parliament are Christian. As many as 26 Church of England bishops, known as Lords Spiritual, sit in the House of Lords and read prayers at the start of each daily meeting. Sittings in both Houses of Parliament begin with Christian prayers.

    Comment by B Shantanu | February 23, 2012

  7. ^ Secularism does not mean anti-majority-religion, as is often and commonly interpreted in India, and sometimes, by lefties/liberals elsewhere.

    Comment by Kaffir | February 23, 2012

  8. Also, many western European countries which are liberal and progressive (Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland) also have Christianity (or some version of it) as the official or state religion – a clear acknowledgment of their tradition, history. I’m also willing to bet that these countries, while not being officially secular, offer more (or at least the same) rights to citizens belonging to minority religion than (as) do some secular countries.

    Only in India do idiots interpret, in a perverted manner, “secularism” to mean “anti-Hindu.”

    Comment by Kaffir | February 23, 2012

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.